<sylvie> Hi! the French
bridge does not work anymore, I try to connect again with the
boston one

<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to
note the volunteer's limited job

<shawn> outreach opportunity
to volunteers

Shawn: Hope to do more promotion
of UAAG and ATAG in 2011.
... one way to do that is to review the placeholder pages for
those and Liam will
... volunteer to bring those up to date.
... Jeanne Spelman is with us and we will look at other related
pages and get an idea of what our goals will be on these
pages.

Overview of W3C website "bucket pages"

Shawn: Follow the link in IRC to
a brief intro of these pages.
... remember that we spent a good deal of time on the
Accessibility page in 2009, awesome page, good work group and
especially Liam.
... look at Browser and Authoring tools pages and that's what
we want to work on.

Shawn: the Accessibility page
that we worked on in much more detailed than the others. Look
at alternate pages to see how they are organized and presented
so you can see that we don't need as much depth as we provided
in Accessibility page.
... thi one has just 3 paragraphs essentially.
... We want to get something on these pages to promote
accessibility work with the idea that we can later revise
it.
... questions?

All: Yes, clear

Sylvie: It is not clear to me
whether we are looking at the content or navigation?

Shawn: Only the content.
Navigation is completely set. Current content is just
placeholder we will develop.

Jennifer; next steps are to review content
developed by Liam?

Liam: I would like the group to
help me brainstorm and explore the idea that these pages are
gateways to ATAG and UAAG.

Shawn: There is other work
related to browsers and authoring tools and I have put out the
word to those who may want to contribute. But our focus is
accessibility issues related to these.

Liam: Can I see the list?

Shawn: Yes, have at it Liam!

Liam: On each of these pages, I
would like to give people a sense of whay they should care,
resources and then some info on the how-to. Finally if
approapriate, some on who is working on this.
... can we just start with people explaining to me why a reader
should bother with UAAG?

Jeanne: From my point of view,
many accessibility problems could be solved with more
accessible browsers. Things that content developers struggle
with could be less problematic with better browsers. My
favorite example is keyboard tool tips.

Liam: Cool.
... anything else? You are assuming that the reader already
cares about accessibility.

Jeanne: True we must assume that
people coming here don't know much about accessibility and are
not likely to care. So must explain the bigger picture. having
browsers that conform to standards benefit everyone.
Interoperability, internationalization and then lead to
accessibility.

Liam: Could we explore some
examples of how there are benefits to all?

Liam: While browser makers may
not do a terribly good job, certainly they understand the basic
need for accessibility. Is there a greater reason then to
address to smaller toolmakers?
... the primary audience for this may not be major browser
makers.

Shawn: On analysis page is the
idea that we may want to address those who buy these systems,
procureres?
... developers who may choose and embed a media player may want
to consider accessibility features.

Liam: a valuable group but
divergent from typical procurement groups.

Ian: is it going too far for the
WAI to recommend browsers. I suspect so.

Shawn: We have in the past had
comments about conformance by major browsers.

Jeanne: Labor intensive to have
that kept current. And to put it on an intro page introduces
obsolesence.

Ian: It needs to make sure that
accessiiblity is considered when making a decision, but
managing browser review may be too much.

Liam: If we can not support that
kind of review, then perhaps procurers are not an audience

Shawn: We do have something
(outdated) about how to choose an authoring tool, we can
suggest that procurers ask vendors how they meet UAAG?

Liam: How

Shawn: RFP language, definitions,
can also say here is what we would like to have.
... here are top priorities.

Sandi: How do extension and
add-on developers fit into compliance framework?
... if they think about accessibility they may influence
browser makers.

Liam: Brilliant.

Sandi: Who are those people
responsible to when it comes to confomrance?

Shawn: Most browsers don't have
requirements. So, not anybody actually.

Jennifer: I don't think it works
like that. There is no way that Mozilla has any clue about
accessibility nor do they have the means to chack.

Sandi: But can we influence that
group?

Janneifer: I think influening
them would be awesome, I just don't think the browser maker
will do it.

Liam: If you want to develop for
a particular browser, there are specs to halp you get going,
etc.

Liam: Can inspire additional
audience groups which be great.
... what does special purpose browser mean?

Jennifer: Is assistive tech
included?

Jan: yes, a user agent can
include a few things - browsers, AT, media players. But
sometimes useful to separate them. Interesting new sub-class
are ones that convert things to Google docs, web based

Liam: Would UAAG have anything to
address this? Do we need to particularize for special purpose
browsers?

Jan: Make it clear that other
layers in the stack can accomplish other parts of UAAG
implementation.

Jeanne: It also goes the other
way? Some browsers may want to use plug ins as a way to achieve
accessibility conformance.

Liam: how to determine if
assitive tech is a user agent?

Jeanne: One of the unintended
consequences is that AT usually addresses specifc populations
and may not meet all the UAAG requirements.

Sandi: Defined in different
ways

Jennifer: Browsers in phones are
considered user agents
... I am thinking about tools that people build that work
within browsers. Testing tools are out of scope?

Jan: Considered more of an
authoring tool

Shawn: and we will address those
soon.

Liam: We have a reasonalbe sense
of why and what. I will admit ot only a passing familiarity to
UAAG. Since it is in draft, should it be referenced?

Shawn: Point to Overview page.
Both will be progressing to next stages in 2011, so best would
be to leave it open-ended. "UAAG 1 was finalized whenever and
UAAG 2 is in development"...and link to overview.
... usually say something about how it is best to go ahead and
use it.

Liam: are we there yet?

Jeanne: It is pretty stable.

Jan: Yes I don't see it changing
radically.

Liam: apart from UAAG WG are
there other groups to reference?

Shawn: I put WAI ARIA
implementation guide from Protocols and

Jan: defeintely from an
accessibility perspective. make the point that UA are rendering
all the tech that other group's work produces. Want to link to
other work.

Shawn: certainly some of the
specs have specific guidance and I hope that others will point
to it.

Jan: Yes, there is a link to the
defininition of authoring tools.
... reads...

Liam: lots and lots and lots and
lots of small developers is the audience

Sandi: and could target Open
Source community, an audience more likely to be open to these
ideas and could be a good group to target.

Jan: another point is having good
ATAG implementation means the small developer would not have to
have WCAG on their desk. Good implementation of ATAG means
authors are guided and prompted.

Liam: so the how-to stuff is
where we have a challenge to meet the needs of a large and
diverse group of potential audiences.

Jan: There is useful guidance in
all
... ties it in to the other recommendations.

Liam: Just like the extension
developers. If there is no reference to accessibility, seem
unimportant.
... is it useful to point a facebook app developer to ATAG?

Jan: yes!

Liam: is ATAG2 at a stage where
you can refer to it?

Jan: tentatively, probably more
stable than UAAG

Jeanne: ATAG is in Last Call and
so much farther along and referencable.

Liam: Lots of integration with
WCAG and UAAG.

Jan: Yes, for sure

Shawn: Developers often refer to
WCAG but are unaware of ATAG and UAAG.

Liam: Ruby on Rails and Python -
authoring tools?

Ian: No, but I was thinking aobut
languages in this context. A good first step is to put your
work in a recognizable form rather than coming up with omething
propriatory. Is it worth linking to formats that W3C uses?

Liam: that is more about openness
than accessibility.

Jan: Have tried to formulate a
requirement around formats. Came to idea that there is really
no way to define accessible formats. Rather have taken the
posiiton of accessibility supports provided for that
format?

Jennifer: Hopefully canvas will
help.

Ian: the only way to make it
acessible is with good authoring tools.

Liam: can we talk about that on
the new page?
... what groups are working on it?

Shawn: Maybe in ARIA? not
sure

Jan: no, we just see ARIA as a
tool that you may or may not use

Liam: Do you have a list of
documentation for authoring tools that reference ATAG.

Jan: we have the overview,
implementation documents, etc. We did some reviews previoulsy
but obsolesence is a real problem.

<shawn> ******* wording that
we used when WCAG 2 was close but not done: "We encourage you
to start using WCAG 2.0 now. Until WCAG 2.0 is finalized, WCAG
1.0 is the completed, referenceable version. If your site is
required to meet WCAG 1.0, you may choose to develop it to meet
both WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0." - we'll need to confirm if we're
ready to say that for UAAG. I'm pretty sure that we are for
ATAG.

Liam: But there are pages that
should be in the related documents section. Good. Anything
else?

Shawn: I found the wording from
WCAG2, it's in IRC.
... if you have comments not for discussion, send directly to
Liam or to editor's list. Thanks Jeanne and jan. Should we send
drafts to both lists or any thoughts on that?

Liam: my first draft will be
quite discussable. will have things that people think should
not possibly be in and start arguemnts.
... are we likely to get many many many replies?

Shawn: a few.
... thanks again!

<Jan> bye

Reminder of open reviews

Shawn: if you haven't looked at
these documents, please do. Some are some not ready for
copyediting review.

Jennifer: when they are, please
feel free to say can you turn this around in 3 days or
whatever.

Shawn: There is plenty to review.
With most will do one more pass and then ask for permission to
publish. So please get comments in asap.
... remind Ian of the slidey thing on your to-do list.
... Doyle will not be active in the group for a while so we
will need people to take turns minuting. I will set up a
rotation schedule.

All: congratulations!

Shawn: any other news or comments
from anyone?
... have a great new year!